swm_disable

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states 'write' (mutation) and 'requires confirmation', which is a useful behavioral cue, but it does not explain the confirmation process, what happens on failure, whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a write operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specified. It front-loads the action but omits critical details such as parameter roles and confirmation flow, making it too sparse to be considered appropriately sized.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a write operation with no output schema, no annotations, and three undocumented parameters, the description is grossly inadequate. It does not explain the confirmation workflow, prerequisites, or expected outcomes, leaving the agent unable to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description mentions no parameters at all. It hints at confirmation with 'requires confirmation' but does not link that to confirm_token or confirmation_id, nor does it explain user_code. The agent has no guidance on what each parameter does.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'disable' and a resource 'switch management', clearly distinguishing it from read tools like swm_show and its counterpart swm_enable. However, it does not elaborate on what switch management entails, so it is not a full 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage (when you want to disable switch management) but provides no explicit context, prerequisites, or alternatives. It mentions 'requires confirmation' but does not explain when or how to obtain confirmation, nor does it contrast with swm_enable or other management tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.